I like to do my interval training on a treadmill as the speed and distance is easily controlled. Am currently doing 800m interval at 6min/mile pace, followed by 400m @ 10min/mile. Repeating 6 times.
Trouble is, 6 min/mile is top speed of our machine. As I get better should I:
a/ Increase the length of each interval e.g. 1200m?
b/ Go for more intervals: 10 x 800m??
c/ Keep the same speed and distance but run uphill?
d/ Buy a decent treadmill? Other than this issue however treadmill works well.
Intervals are mainly aimed at improving 10k times.
I presume most treadmills go much faster than this? i.e 4 min/mile
0 ·
Comments
That's pretty fast. I know the gym ones go up to at least 18kmh, but I think they are pretty pricey ones.
I'd go for a or b really I think.
I've had a look into buying my own, and surprisingly a large number (at the cheaper end) have a 10mph topspeed
Rather than fork out 2k+ I would opt for more reps.
I tend to do up to 10 x 800s at 10mph, with 400 recovs.
I however alternate this with 16 x 400s with 200m recovs, 6-8 1200s with 400 recovs and 5-6 1600s with 400s. The latter two are quite tough at 10mph....
For sharper sprint training, I often do a 20 x 1min fast / 1min slow on the roads. I try to run quite hard but not 'flat out'.
The other alternative is a football pitch/park, doing 10-15 laps, sprinting the 'length' , slow jog/walk behind the goals.
If you have access to a track, then timed 200s/400s are also an option, but getting the correct pace (say 84s 400s) is a matter of trial and error (or it was when I tried!)
Like you, I find the treadmill works well given its limits, hence the alternatives.
Hope that helps.
I would use the incline
or better still GO OUTSIDE
38min 10k is flying.
<steals interval session off HH>
If working at 16 I find that my intervals get longer as I personally do not like incline running in the mill
Always run with the 'mill on 1%
too technical for me as well :¬)
I set all my sessions up based around what I am training for and have a fast enough treadmill to cope
I have good pace judgement and can usually run to within a couple of seconds of a minute mile pace and I find the table to be accurate. For example when I am out on a run and I try and run at what I perceive to be the same effort as 2% at 16kmh I will usually find I am running at between 5.50 and 5.55 min/miling.
It works for me.
I took a look at the site.
It is even worse than I thought. I had forgotten about the wind resistance. I should be running on a 2% gradient anyway to replicate treadmill to real running.
So why does a treadmill feel harder even though it is easier?
I can look up 6min/mile effort but as an example he equates 7:20 pace to 12.9 on a 2.2 gradient.
......for a whole marathon!!!!!!!
slooooooooowwwwwwww!!!!!!!!
Lack of wind resistance and a moving track effectively leading to a higher efficiency are the reasons why many people cite the 1-2% gradient as being required to simulate outdoor running.
On the flip side of the coin, many taller people run on a treadmill with a shorter stride length which leads to an increased perceived effort. Also, many treadmill manufacturers are now compensating for these inaccuaracies in their algorhythms and adjusting the design of the equipment as well as the way in which the speed measurement is displayed.
I for one have always found it easier to achieve an PB at any distance outdoors than on a treadmill.
The playing field is far from flat.....
JJ